Hmmm... how is it that none of the 'gold' Seiko Retros exist in the UK, but loads are available from the US?
Did Seiko direct all the (slighfly) bling version straight to our friends over the pond, or did our liberated cousins voluntarily snap up anything with a golden glint, only to decide they would be better off filtering them back to us, gradually, surreptitiously... at far more than we should be paying? (Once you include import duty, etc etc).
These things bother me.

Oh, and this guy talks about NTT statistics, and the strange reluctance of drug companies to make them more widely known...
TED talk on decision making
He takes a while to get there, but it's worth watching.

My personal experience isn't good. A liver test six months into treatment showed that I needed to stop taking statins immediately, as they were causing muscle damage (which, if unchecked, can be fatal).
The official statistics for this kind of side-effect talk about 'a few cases per million', but I am aware of five people that started them roughly when I did, and two of us had severe complications. Of the remaining three, only one still takes them. The other two had lesser complications, but still sufficiently unpleasant to halt treatment.
As you say, when assessing the glowing reports for these drugs, it's important to ask who benefits the most from them being prescribed. An interesting aspect to this is 'Number Needed to Treat' (or NTT), a statistic which indicates how many people need to take a drug, over a specified period, for the drug to achieve its designated goal. In the case of statins, a 2015 article in the Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine revealed that, at age 50, 1000 men would need to take a statin for 5 years (at a cost of more than £200,000) in order to delay one death.
Obviously you need to make your own decision Mike, but ask for specific NTT figures for the suggested treatment and be very alive to the chances of an adverse reaction, should you decide to go ahead.
K
P.S. Various industry studies have shown statins to be one of the five most profitable drugs ever produced. Just putting that out there...

Easy. We all guess how many Pounds Sterling it is to the Euro in four weeks time. Those who voted for Brexit can have two guesses, and those who believed a word Boris Johnson said can have three guesses.
Although in four weeks time, two guesses will only be worth 0.8 guesses, and three will only be worth... well, you get the idea.

Holy Cow they go for big bucks!
Had a very generous offer from a forum member on a Sony SLR digital, but still struggling to make a decision. There seem to be quite a few models and variants of the PEN - just stumbled across the 'mini' range, which might do the trick. Or not.
My head hurts

Sorry to jump on your thread Mr Bond, but I too am looking for a half-decent digital, mainly to take pictures of flowers and the like (ah!).
But me being me, I rather fancy the idea of picking up and old Olympus Pen E-P1 (or maybe 2...).
Am I bonkers? I had a lovely Olympus Trip when I were a lad, but it ended up in a ravine in what is now Croatia. I kind of miss it, and am a bit of a sucker for the retro look.
K

Well, given that Farage specifically said, back in May, that a 52:48 win for Remain would not be sufficiently decisive - and that he would call for a second referendum under such circumstances - presumably he will be announcing his support for such a referendum any minute now...

Hmm... except that proper democracy is, of course, dependent upon informed decision making, and it is already crystal clear that the Leave campaign was based upon what we could generously describe as 'misinformation'.
Within 1 hour of the result Farage had, for instance, already backtracked on the £350m figure plastered all over the campaign bus, saying he never agreed that figure was accurate... and no, of course it won't get spent on the NHS.... Farage backtracks on £350m for NHS pledge
As for that amazing new deal we are sure to get with EU, this excerpt from the Economist - which kinda knows its stuff - sums it up perfectly:
In practice the EU will offer Britain only two possible deals. The first is to join Norway in the European Economic Area. This would preserve full access to the single market. But, like Norway, Britain would have to make a hefty contribution to the EU budget (Norway pays about 85% as much as Britain per head), observe all EU single-market regulations with no say in making them and, crucially, accept free movement of people from the EU. It is hard to imagine a post-Brexit government accepting this. The second is a free-trade deal like the EU’s with Canada. Yet this does not cover all trade, does not eliminate non-tariff barriers, excludes most financial services and could take years to agree.
The other option for Britain is to revert to trading with the EU as America, China and India do, under normal World Trade Organisation rules. But most economists say this would make the economic damage from Brexit worse. It would bring back mutual tariffs on cars, pharmaceuticals, food and fish. It would reinstate many non-tariff barriers. And it would exclude most services, including financial services.
Finally. the referendum was in fact 'advisory' not 'mandatory' - the decision is reversible at any stage up until MPs invoke Article 50. Until then, there are several different ways in which the result can be overturned. If there was a General Election and the winning party campaigned on a 'Get Back into the EU' platform the decision would have to be overturned.
So, if you're thinking perhaps what you voted for is not quite what you're getting now, here's the petition... which is currently receiving 12,000 votes a minute:
EU Vote Petition